Remove an Ansible template from a SemaphoreUI project by providing project ID and template ID. Deletes the specified template to clean up unused configurations.
Delete a template.
Args: project_id: ID of the project template_id: ID of the template to delete
Returns: Empty dict on success
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| project_id | Yes | ||
| template_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, and the description only states 'Delete a template' and returns an empty dict. It does not disclose irreversibility, side effects on related entities (e.g., schedules, tasks), or authorization requirements.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is very short and to the point, with no redundant information. However, it could be slightly expanded to include important context without losing conciseness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the simplicity of the operation (delete with two IDs), the description is barely adequate. It lacks information on error cases, prerequisites, and the impact of deletion on related resources, which is important for a destructive operation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. However, the description only repeats parameter names from the schema without explaining their semantics, constraints, or how to obtain valid IDs.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states 'Delete a template.' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_template, update_template, get_template, and list_templates. It is concise and unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites mentioned, and no context about cascading effects or required permissions. The description simply states the action without usage conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.